Is O-Chul the same guy as Roy?

[Munsi]

This is a trifle abstract, and has absolutely nothing to do with the plot, but bear with me.

A player character (Roy) is killed in a climactic act ending battle. The rest of his party means to return him from the dead but, due to circumstances, months go by before they can do so. Roy is enjoying lawful good heaven, but without a player character to play, what is the (admittedly hypothetical and non-existant) player who played Roy doing? Adventuring in heaven, where there's not much to do other than wait to be revived? It strikes me as unlikely.

Conveniently at about the same time as Roy was killed, O-Chul showed up and started having a much more significant impact on the plot. He'd been around previous to Roy's death, but not NEARLY in the same plot-driving way as he became after Roy's death. Obviously, in an actual RPG, should a PC be killed off, the player complains, then rolls up another character. In the event that somebody playing a Lawful Good Fighter were to lose his character, a Paladin would be an easy choice to play.

So what do you figure? Does O-Chul make sense as a character being played by Roy's "Player" make sense as a theory? Was that how he was intended? Now that Roy's back, what will become of him? Or does any part of this matter, seeing as how OOTS is a narrative structure based on an RPG, rather than an actual RPG? I'm not sure, myself. This is just what i'm thinking about at the moment. As well as a good example of why i ought to quit internetting* at 4:00 in the morning.













*internetting(tm) is a totally real word

[boolean]

There are no players.

[Figgin of Chaos]

There are PCs and NPCs, we know that much. The existence of players is a logical conclusion, although one would think that it'd have come up by now given OOT's occasional breaking of the fourth wall.

But assuming there are players, this theory is plausible. In my group, it's common for players to take over NPCs when our normal characters are out of commission, occupied, or otherwise absent. The NPC is usually around the PCs while this is going on, though, and O-Chul, for most of his foray into the plot, was not. Admittedly, he would have been had Belkar (or was it Haley?) not forsaken him…

There are two main things I can think of to look for: First, how similar is O-Chul to Roy? Their alignments are the same, yes. But not all players stick to one alignment. The real clues are subtle: Small role-playing choices that the players making them take for granted. Second, now that Roy is back in the game, will O-Chul resume his backseat?

I doubt we'll find an answer to this question. But the pursuit itself is worthwhile.

[Hallavast]

Is the player of Roy the same person as the one who plays O-chul?

Since there are no players, your premise (that there are players) is false. Thus your question is automatically a vaccuous truth.

So the answer is yes, since there are no actual players.

For the record, all Lions born with plaid manes are homosexual. :smalltongue:

[Kish]

There are PCs and NPCs, we know that much. The existence of players is a logical conclusion, although one would think that it'd have come up by now given OOT's occasional breaking of the fourth wall.
It (or rather the lack thereof) did (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0606.html), remember?

Rich has said that there are no players. Logical conclusion or not.

[Devonix]

Did anyone actually read the OP he knows that there are no actual players he's just asking if this were an actuall RP could you see Roys player as taking over O-chul during his character's death. I'd say he'd be more likely to have taken control of Hinjo.

Part of the reason that Hinjo didn't get much done in getting control of the Kingdom properly being that the DM wouldn't want the PCs to have too much easy access to the nation

[Jaltum]

I can't see it; O-Chul spent most of the time a prisoner a long way away from everyone else. He might as well have been in Heaven himself for all the fun he would be to play.

[Snake-Aes]

This is a trifle abstract, and has absolutely nothing to do with the plot, but bear with me.

A player character (Roy) is killed in a climactic act ending battle. The rest of his party means to return him from the dead but, due to circumstances, months go by before they can do so. Roy is enjoying lawful good heaven, but without a player character to play, what is the (admittedly hypothetical and non-existant) player who played Roy doing? Adventuring in heaven, where there's not much to do other than wait to be revived? It strikes me as unlikely.

Conveniently at about the same time as Roy was killed, O-Chul showed up and started having a much more significant impact on the plot. He'd been around previous to Roy's death, but not NEARLY in the same plot-driving way as he became after Roy's death. Obviously, in an actual RPG, should a PC be killed off, the player complains, then rolls up another character. In the event that somebody playing a Lawful Good Fighter were to lose his character, a Paladin would be an easy choice to play.

So what do you figure? Does O-Chul make sense as a character being played by Roy's "Player" make sense as a theory? Was that how he was intended? Now that Roy's back, what will become of him? Or does any part of this matter, seeing as how OOTS is a narrative structure based on an RPG, rather than an actual RPG? I'm not sure, myself. This is just what i'm thinking about at the moment. As well as a good example of why i ought to quit internetting* at 4:00 in the morning.













*internetting(tm) is a totally real word
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/slides.png

[derfenrirwolv]

Makes sense to me

[AstralFire]

"There are no players" not withstanding, I've seen this theory once before - it's a very well supported one, though. Kudos!

[multilis]

O-Chul got a bigger part in action after Miko died, therefore O'Chul is Miko reincarnated. Proof both Paladins and both tough (Miko survived for a bit after the explosion, fall, and being cut in half)

;-)

[jamroar]

So what do you figure? Does O-Chul make sense as a character being played by Roy's "Player" make sense as a theory? Was that how he was intended? Now that Roy's back, what will become of him? Or does any part of this matter, seeing as how OOTS is a narrative structure based on an RPG, rather than an actual RPG? I'm not sure, myself. This is just what i'm thinking about at the moment. As well as a good example of why i ought to quit internetting* at 4:00 in the morning.


Getting tortured daily in captivity for half a year isn't really my idea of an interesting adventure. Most of it happened offscreen anyway.

Ignoring that players don't exist, if it's anyone, it's Daigo, who showed up, got promoted to PC and hooked up with one of the split parties immediately after Roy's death and shared their adventures like a backup alt character.

[Faceist]

If we're dealing with hypotheticals of this nature, I choose to believe Roys player was allowed to play as Xykon during his climatic fight with V. Hamming it up as a card carrying, chaotic evil monster would be a great reprieve from Roydom.

[Darakonis]

Getting tortured daily in captivity for half a year isn't really my idea of an interesting adventure. Most of it happened offscreen anyway.

Ignoring that players don't exist, if it's anyone, it's Daigo, who showed up, got promoted to PC and hooked up with one of the split parties immediately after Roy's death and shared their adventures like a backup alt character.

+1

Could you really envision this scenario occurring at your game table?

DM: Your character is dead.
Player: Aw man... that's bad...
DM: Don't worry, I'll let you control one of the cooler NPCs.
Player: Oh. That's good.
DM: However, he's currently being held prisoner by higher-level villains who torture him daily, and he has pretty much no chance of escaping alive without some kind of Deus Ex Machina.
Player: ...that's bad.
DM: But don't worry, while the other players are off adventuring, you'll get to roleplay conversations with a childlike creature.
Player: ...
DM: That's good!
Player: So when is my character getting res'd?

The DM would have to be a pretty big jerk to make Roy's player take over O-Chul.

[AstralFire]

I've had players -ask- me to get to temporarily play odder. You never know which NPCs they'll fall in love with.

[Bibliomancer]

Personally, I think that your solution is too simplistic. I think that Roy's character started playing Haley, Haley's started playing Belkar, Belkar's started playing Vaarsuvius, Vaarsuvius' started playing Elan, and Elan's started playing Hinjo. Durkon stayed the same, thus explaining the odd degree of personality 'development' that has occurred recently. This is simply a rough draft. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to refine it?

[David Argall]

As said, there are no players.
If there were, "Roy" and "O-Chul" would be obviously different people.
In particular, "O-Chul" would be an NPC for the DM, who is injecting too much of himself into the character, or is somebody the DM is trying to get on the good side of by giving out a super-powerful character.

[ericgrau]

I think there's a strip confirming that there are no players. In Belkar's chaotic alignment hallucination shortly before the mark was removed. The way it was worded also suggested that the fact that there was no players was established before that strip.

[Berserk Monk]

There are no players.

Neither are there spoons, and the cake is a lie.

Also, I doubt some one of Roy's level who died falling to his death could have survived an explosion that destroyed the largest build in Azure City and survive a fall to the ground.

[FrankNorman]

They are all being played by Rich Burlew.

[Puns de León]

+1

Could you really envision this scenario occurring at your game table?

DM: Your character is dead.
Player: Aw man... that's bad...
DM: Don't worry, I'll let you control one of the cooler NPCs.
Player: Oh. That's good.
DM: However, he's currently being held prisoner by higher-level villains who torture him daily, and he has pretty much no chance of escaping alive without some kind of Deus Ex Machina.
Player: ...that's bad.
DM: But don't worry, while the other players are off adventuring, you'll get to roleplay conversations with a childlike creature.
Player: ...
DM: That's good!
Player: So when is my character getting res'd?

The DM would have to be a pretty big jerk to make Roy's player take over O-Chul.


DM: While you're waiting, have a free frogurt!



Personally, I think that your solution is too simplistic. I think that Roy's character started playing Haley, Haley's started playing Belkar, Belkar's started playing Vaarsuvius, Vaarsuvius' started playing Elan, and Elan's started playing Hinjo. Durkon stayed the same, thus explaining the odd degree of personality 'development' that has occurred recently. This is simply a rough draft. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to refine it?

This is great! It accounts pretty well enough for everything. Seems all this other radical character development was mostly lost to public awareness in the tempest surrounding V. The only gripe I have is with Elan's player switching to Hinjo, who doesn't act very doltish or free-spirited, and in fact doesn't do much at all; Celia may be a candidate, though Elan was never quite so annoying.

Has anyone else noticed that Rich has been throwing in a lot more references to Elan's using his Bardic Knowledge (Literary Devices and Tropes) feat to guide him in major decisions (the most recent being his argument against telling Haley about Therkla)? It appears to be a representation of his maturing into a responsible, able character, while still keeping with his bard image.

[hamishspence]

In this case, it looks more like choosing not to "stick to the trope"

Which still shows a certain maturity.

[Tijne]

If this was a possible case, I'd say it's more likely that the guy who played Roy took over Celia's character.

She's an NPC close to Roy -- his girlfriend...
Her prime objective was to ressurect him as soon as possible...
She showed up after he died, sticking with the party until he got revived...
She wanted to avoid all battles/conflict (So that the other players didn't gain xp without him; makes sense IMO. ;D).
She was completely different from Roy in every possible way. (A nice break from the same old.)..

[Acero]

i find it hard for some1 2 b 2 players.
Roy has been training w/ Horace. thing happen between the strips

[veti]

A PC is one who, when they see a note on a tavern door asking for someone to undertake a long and dangerous quest, says "Sure, why not?" In other words: they're someone who has no short- or medium-term commitments or loyalties, except those they've gained in-game.

Neither O-Chul nor any other member of the Sapphire Guard can say that

To me it seems obvious that Roy's player's stand-in PC was: Celia.

[Darius1020]

For the record, all Lions born with plaid manes are homosexual. :smalltongue:

Wait, what? How did no one else address this post?

[Bibliomancer]

Wait, what? How did no one else address this post?

Their adsurdity filters were set too high for them to read it.

Personally, I wasn't sure how to respond, though since you called attention to it I'll settle for a "..." possibly followed by a "Here, ingest this sugar coated pastry that certainly does not contain your medication."

[Saknussem]

Read "Hempel's Paradox", also known as The Paradox of the Ravens. It is a neat little problem that undermines the known scientific method and inductive reasoning. It is pretty applicable to the Roy/O-Chul relationship. You'll see -- all "Non-Roy", "Non-O-Chuls" are also "Non-players". It gets weirder.

[Bibliomancer]

If I read that correctly, the flaw is that, while "All Ravens are black," not "All Black things are ravens," regardless of how you phrase it.

However, I'm curious. Using this system, what else occurs that you define as "weirder?"

[Sholos]

I don't see how it's a paradox. Proving that everything that is not black is not a raven does prove that all ravens are black (by virtue of preventing any non-black thing from being a raven), but it doesn't follow that the sight of a single non-black, non-raven item would say anything about the color of a raven. You have to have every non-black proven to not be a raven before you can say that all ravens are black.

[imp_fireball]

Chances are this isn't the case. Both characters spent a good portion of time in captivity (Roy in heaven, O-Chul in the cage) and while roleplaying could apply to either one, chances are the man playing Roy would be told to roleplay in heaven - considering Rich chose to show scenes of Roy in heaven at all.

[Random832]

I don't see how it's a paradox. Proving that everything that is not black is not a raven does prove that all ravens are black

That part wasn't the paradox.

[Sholos]

That part wasn't the paradox.

What's your point? That wasn't the part I was addressing.

[lothos]

DM: While you're waiting, have a free frogurt!
frogurt = Frog Flavoured Yoghurt ? Ewwwwwww if that's what you meant.

Makes a change from Cheese I guess.

[Itamarcu]

Uhhhh.... Roy didn't play O-Chul when he was dead, O-Chul played Roy while Roy was alive.

[Spiky]

It's pretty obvious that Roy's player was actually killed when Roy died. To keep up the realism.

Now that Roy's back....um, auditions, anyone?

[Random832]

What's your point? That wasn't the part I was addressing.

Huh? You said "I don't see how that's a paradox" and proceeded to explain how part of the premise that is not claimed to be a paradox is not a paradox.


frogurt = Frog Flavoured Yoghurt ? Ewwwwwww if that's what you meant.

frogurt = frozen yogurt.

The frogurt is also cursed.

But you get your choice of toppings.

The toppings contain potassium benzoate.

[Jackson]

or is somebody the DM is trying to get on the good side of by giving out a super-powerful character.
And not letting him do anything. Because that's how you win people over.

[Sholos]

Huh? You said "I don't see how that's a paradox" and proceeded to explain how part of the premise that is not claimed to be a paradox is not a paradox.

Okay, maybe (probably) it was bad wording on my part. Maybe I missed where the paradox appears entirely. I simply don't agree with the premise that the two together imply that the sight of any single non-black, non-raven object implies that all ravens are black.

[Puns de León]

(Edited for complete dialogue)



frogurt = frozen yogurt.

The frogurt is also cursed.
That's bad.
But you get your choice of toppings.
That's good!
The toppings contain potassium benzoate.
...
That's bad.


Yes. This. ^

Taken entirely out of context, it occurs to me that 'The frogurt is also cursed!' bears similarity to 'The cake is a lie!'. It's got that great 'shout it in the streets' quality.

[Darakonis]

Huh? You said "I don't see how that's a paradox" and proceeded to explain how part of the premise that is not claimed to be a paradox is not a paradox.



frogurt = frozen yogurt.

The frogurt is also cursed.

But you get your choice of toppings.

The toppings contain potassium benzoate.

Good to know at least one person got my Simpson's reference ;)

Anyway, sorry OP, but I haven't seen a convincing argument that Roy and O-Chul are/were played by the same player.

[Jackson]

Sholos: A paradox like that is for people who work heavily in deductive reasoning (i.e. logicians and philosophers), not really for regular people (this isn't meant as a put-down, since I'm also a 'regular person' in this loose dichotomy; it's just a fact that in normal life stringent rules of logic aren't regularly applied like they are in the specialized world of analytic philosophers). It's meant to show the flaw in a certain type of logical reasoning. The specific flaw that you're also pointing out. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

[Sholos]

Ah, I see. It's for people who have learned how to think in an impractical manner. Got it.

[Jackson]

It's for people who've confused a system that's convenient for working out certain problems with one that's applicable to reality in general. So yeah, same thing.

[DnDgeek13]

to support this theory, in this comic,
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0403.html
last panel, roy even says that he feels a strong spiritual kinship.

[Herald Alberich]

to support this theory, in this comic,
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0403.html
last panel, roy even says that he feels a strong spiritual kinship.

The key words there are "last panel". Like Belkar, you can't take anything Roy says in the last panel seriously, because that's where the joke is. In this case, that both Roy and O-Chul find Lord Shojo to be aggravating.

[Watcher]

First discussion: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0606.html, sixth panel, Belkar's speech bubble.